SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Qualcomm Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting
QCOM 152.21-0.3%Jan 29 3:59 PM EST
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: J Langholtz who wrote (61260)3/21/2007 7:03:54 PM
From: engineer  Read Replies (3) of 197428
 
The issue is not the remedy, but the complete overkill of the remedy.

If you propose that a programmable product COULD be programmed to infringe, then you need to start downt he list of things a PC can infringe on. start with the ABILITY to decode DVDs. On the notion that Dell cannot ship a PC to anyone because they cannot prevent the party fromusing it to decode a DVD and thus infringe on a patent or copy right would make everyone yell FOUL.

That is the concept here. QCOM already provided a workaround to stop the infringement, but the part can still be programmed to infringe. So if Qualcomm takes it out and the licensee takes it out, then whyis the ASIc itself banned from importation?

It seems the right solution would be to do as the PC people have done and go after the particular infringer.

That is why people are yelling FOUL, not because a patent is being enforced.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News